Given that nutritious food is delicious and good for health, and that honey is nutritious, what can we conclude about honey and delicious food?

Introduction / Context:
This question tests basic logical inference using simple everyday statements. We are told that nutritious food is both delicious and good for health, and that honey is nutritious. We must judge which conclusions follow about honey's effect on health and about whether every delicious food must be nutritious. The key is to track the direction of implications and not to assume the reverse without justification.

Given Data / Assumptions:

• Statement 1: Nutritious food is delicious and good for health.
• Statement 2: Honey is nutritious.
• Conclusion I: Honey is good for health.
• Conclusion II: Delicious foods are nutritious.

Concept / Approach:
We can interpret the main statement as: If a food is nutritious, then it is delicious and good for health. In logical form, Nutritious ⇒ Delicious and Nutritious ⇒ Good for health. Honey is stated to be nutritious, so we can apply these implications directly to honey. But we must be careful not to flip the direction, that is, not to assume Delicious ⇒ Nutritious without evidence.

Step-by-Step Solution:
Step 1: Let N(x) mean 'x is nutritious', D(x) mean 'x is delicious', and H(x) mean 'x is good for health'. Step 2: The statement 'Nutritious food is delicious and good for health' can be read as: For any food x, if N(x) is true, then D(x) and H(x) are both true. Symbolically, N(x) ⇒ D(x) and N(x) ⇒ H(x). Step 3: We are told 'Honey is nutritious.' That is N(honey) is true. Step 4: Applying the implication N(x) ⇒ H(x) to honey, we get H(honey) is true. In words, honey is good for health. So Conclusion I follows directly and logically. Step 5: Now consider Conclusion II: 'Delicious foods are nutritious.' Our original statement only asserts that nutritious foods are delicious, not that every delicious food must be nutritious. There may be foods that are delicious but not nutritious at all, such as sugary junk food. The implication works only one way: Nutritious ⇒ Delicious, not Delicious ⇒ Nutritious. Step 6: Since we cannot conclude that all delicious foods are nutritious from the given information, Conclusion II does not logically follow.
Verification / Alternative check:
Think of a concrete example: Suppose a cake is very delicious but full of unhealthy ingredients. It is not nutritious, yet it is delicious. This does not contradict the given statement, which only talks about nutritious foods being delicious, not about all delicious foods being nutritious. On the other hand, if honey is nutritious and all nutritious foods are good for health, then honey must be good for health. Any scenario that satisfies the premises will satisfy this conclusion.
Why Other Options Are Wrong:
Option B (Only conclusion II follows) is wrong because we have just seen that Delicious ⇒ Nutritious is not supported by the given information. Option C (Neither conclusion follows) is wrong because Conclusion I clearly and directly follows from the premises. Option D (Both conclusions follow) is wrong since Conclusion II is not logically forced by the statements.
Common Pitfalls:
A common mistake is to treat an implication as reversible. Students see 'Nutritious food is delicious' and incorrectly assume 'Delicious food is nutritious' as well, which is not logically valid. Another error is overlooking the special case of honey: people may focus only on the general statement and forget to apply it specifically to honey, which is explicitly said to be nutritious.
Final Answer:
Because honey is nutritious and all nutritious foods are good for health, we can conclude that honey is good for health. But we cannot conclude that every delicious food is nutritious. Hence, only conclusion I follows.